Piyush Chawla moved around the lobby, wearing an all-access pass. Greetings exchanged, he said, "Now, I'm a Shark," and pointed to the Sussex Sharks badge on his t-shirt. An Indian legspinner swearing allegiance to a foreign club. "People might have forgotten me as I don't play for India anymore, but I'm happy to represent Sussex," he said. Chawla's divided loyalties are a symbol of the cracks that are forming in the foundation of cricket.

Two years ago the IPL established a new order in cricket, introducing the franchise-based system to the game, and making cricketers a commercial commodity. Now the Champions League, conceived on the club-based model of the UEFA Champions League in football, has even greater potential to revolutionise the game: if it clicks, cricket's biggest prize-money event ($2.5 million to the winner) will undoubtedly place more pressure than there already is on players to give precedence to club ahead of country.

Show me the money
Cricket is the only mainstream team sport that survives on international competition. Every other sport lives off club-based or franchise-based competition. "There must be something in the model, for every other sport to follow club-based competition," Neil Maxwell, who was the CEO at Kings XI Punjab in the first IPL, says.

Maxwell, a former Australia A player, who was also once the marketing director at New Zealand Cricket, reckons the difference in the standards of play between the elite nations and the others, as a result of the FTP model, is hurting cricket more than anything else. "We are seeing the flaws in the country-versus-country model, where there is a huge disparity in the standard of teams. Some matches aren't competitive and some countries are choosing to play others more regularly, so you haven't got an even spread of the wealth generation."

Club-based cricket, on the other hand, provides regularity of competition and more balanced contests. That, Maxwell thinks, is the main reason why the Champions League is bound to change cricket.

A probable shot in the arm for events like the IPL and the Champions League is the increasing frustration on the part of players, and player associations, at the relentless international schedules designed by the administrators. Compare this to football, where countries play each other sparingly. Top footballers make US $5-10 million a season playing for their clubs, and though they get paid a pittance to represent their countries, it is the honour and prestige that motivates them to play.

"That is fine on a basis that it is less regular, unlike in cricket where players are called on to play [international cricket] 10-11 months in a year," Maxwell argues.

So has the time arrived where players pick club over country? Dirk Nannes, the Australian fast bowler, who now represents Delhi Daredevils in the Champions League, predicts the club-based model will definitely be a lucrative and viable option especially for some players. "It certainly becomes an attractive option for the older guys who are close to retiring," Nannes says.

Nannes says he would personally still rather play for his country, but "it certainly would be tempting if you are on a high-end IPL contract, where you earn millions of dollars. Then, of course, I would think twice."

It came as quite a shock for Nannes to be picked for Australia earlier this year; he wasn't in the original squad of 30 picked for the World Twenty20. "Without playing a single game of domestic cricket I've gone from being ranked at best 31st to, in the next Twenty20 game, being in the playing XI," he says. "So that has changed things a little bit."

At 33, Nannes says he has to start thinking about life after cricket and how best to prolong his career. How does he stretch his career to, say, the age of 38, he wonders. "Is that going to happen playing four-day cricket? Maybe I've got the chance to play Tests, but if I don't make the squad in another year, what purpose is there for someone my age to play four-day cricket? I don't get a very big wage and it is definitely going to limit my career at the back-end. This is the form of the game I'm good at, and I can play till I'm quite old."

Not all players agree. Justin Langer, the former Australia opener who is now captain of the Somerset Sabres, one of two English sides in the tournament, says the Champions League cannot radically alter the game of cricket, but it will certainly place an extra emphasis on the domestic competition. "For example, for Somerset, a smallish club in the south-west of England, to be thrust on the world stage is a great honour - a huge thrill for both the club and the players" Langer says.

Dean Kino, head of the Champions League governing council, echoes Langer's sentiments. "Contrary to the perception that players might give priority to the club, one of the great benefits of the tournament is, it is going to improve the next generation of international players," Kino says, pointing out how tournaments like the Champions League and the IPL provide opportunities for domestic crickerers to play against, and with, better quality players. "Dirk Nannes and David Warner are good examples of players who have come out of club championships in the past."

"Central contracts have lost their relevance. Ultimately the performers are the players. You will have to play by them"

Amrit Mathur, Delhi Daredevils CEO

Freelancer, mercenary, what's wrong with it anyway?
After years of being subdued by administrators, players, fuelled by the attractive pay packets in the IPL, are daring to make themselves heard. Kevin Pietersen's remark last week about central contracts not being lucrative anymore is a case in point. A few days after that, Dwayne Bravo said that if asked to choose between country and club, he would reflect first on the money on offer on either table. Unlike the two Andrews - Flintoff and Symonds - Pietersen and Bravo haven't yet publicly declared their freelance ambitions, but it seems only a matter of time before players of all calibres start charting independent paths, unshackling themselves from restrictive central contracts.

Amrit Mathur, Delhi Daredevils' chief operating officer, says the biggest challenge facing administrators, starting now, will be player management. "Central contracts have lost their relevance," he says. "Ultimately the performers are the players. You will have to play by them."

Nannes looks at it in practical terms. "People can call me a mercenary, but in five years' time I'm either going to be having a whopping big mortgage because I continued playing first-class cricket or I'm going to have no mortgage and stay comfortable for the rest of life. If you completely take emotions and loyalty out of it, you don't need to slog" he says

Langer, among the proudest upholders of the tradition of the baggy green during his playing days, is clearly a loyalist. "You've got to remember, we had to play a very tough competition in England as a team, as a club, and I'm not sure how this would encourage the freelance system," he points out. Langer thinks the number one priority for all young players is international cricket, and one of the responsibilities of domestic cricket is to accelerate the progress of young players to play international cricket. "IPL and such events are a bonus."

Maxwell isn't too keen on the term freelancer either. "At the end of the day every English Premier League footballer, every NFL player, every NBA player, every baseball player, is representing his club. They are only called freelancers because the model is changing," Maxwell says. Cricket follows an antiquated model, he says, and predicts an "evolution" in the next three to five years.

For Kino, the issue is moot: since the Champions League isn't going to clash with any international series, players don't need to make a choice, he points out. As for whether the new leagues will bring about a flood of premature retirements among established international players, he thinks it is too early to say.

Maxwell is confident that ultimately the club-based system will take over from the international model. "At some point you need to understand what the consumer wants. At this point unfortunately a lot of consumers don't want Test cricket - only the older generation wants Tests and I'm one of them. But a 10-year-old is going to want to play Twenty20 cricket."

The future is already here
An indicator that the club-based model is here to stay can be found in the participation of sponsors for club events. ESPN Star Sports, which has the broadcast rights for the Champions League, stated in a media release that 95% of available advertising inventory has already been sold.

Kino stresses that sponsors have shown enough interest in the market to sustain both types of competition - international as well franchise-based. "Advertising revenues, sponsorship revenues and commercial support for the game is centred around quality of events. The events aren't marginalising each other. On the contrary, they are accommodating each other, from both a commercial and economic perspective.

Maxwell believes the Champions League owes much to the success of the IPL brand. "We opened doors for people to buy equity in cricket two years ago, so the floodgates are open now." An interesting illustration of the paradigm shift is how Indian corporates are now sponsoring most foreign teams that are competing in the Champions League.

Yet a major test for the game is just six months away, when the third season of the IPL will coincide with the latter part of the domestic season in the southern hemisphere. No doubt the club v country debate will come to the fore in very real terms.

It is Lalit Modi who has the last word. Asked if he is confident about the Champions League replicating the success of the IPL, Modi smiles widely and says, "You asked me the same question before the IPL too."

The Champions League is exactly what 20/20 should be - NOT National side cricket. Leave this rubbish for clubs and provinces to make some cash with. Let Nations compete in meaningful real cricket. If players have to think twice about representing their country vs club/franchise club - let them play for the club, and never represent their country again. This is getting rediculous. All these spoilt brats are forgetting what the players of the 70s did for them. Chappell and co. had fulltime jobs when they played cricket. How much does Nannes want? You're 33 for heaven's sake! Oh boo hoo you'll have to work in a job at 38 years of age when you're not playing cricket. Welcome to the real world!

Cric_123
on October 11, 2009, 13:35 GMT

I'm really not sure why everyone associates these leagues with high standard of cricket..IPL was average and I do not expect Champions League to be any better...We must realize, when we compare cricket with football, that there is a clear difference between the quality of players competing in some of the big football leagues and those playing in these pathetic T20 Leagues...Cricket does not have the required depth of talent and ability at this time...I sincerely hope that this improves in future...These leagues are being organized for commercial reasons only..

@Champions League...Let's rename it as Loser's League...3 Teams each from India and Australia (8th and 12th Nation in T20 Worldcup)..Only 4 Teams from 3 semi finalists (NZ, Sri, WI) and none from Pakistan (World Champions)...And we are expecting a good standard of Cricket!!

Vijaykumarsstar
on October 10, 2009, 13:27 GMT

cntd of my last post...After all Cricket is no more a one way game. I started watchin cricket as a 12 year old kid in 1996, by now i started
loosing interst in the game, but this model has renewed it all.It has turned to a players game.

Vijaykumarsstar
on October 10, 2009, 13:26 GMT

I don't think these players going after money is bad. At end of the day, every one of us are running behind it.
The fact that lot of people are angry about is because of the jealousy. This is similar like people changing companies.
If you say this is wrong then that is too wrong. This world is run with the money, there is no person in this world who says
he will work for free. As of the comparison with Football, I don't think we can these are 2 different sports.
Football is an all weather sport and Cricket is a summer sport. You cannot play Cricket throught the year in one place.
That is were the freelancers come to play. They add more glamour to the management and the game expands to good management.
Administrators should stop complaining and start working, they have to take this as a challenge.
Either they have to bring everyone into there own parameter or create a new parameter to accomadate these all.

CharonTFm
on October 10, 2009, 11:43 GMT

Test Cricket and T20 Cricket are completely different games with different strategies and mindset. A great T20 Player doesn't make him a great Test Player and so on. Even if the best Club Players and brought into the National Squad, without testing them on the longer format they will not do well.

These Club games are just a phase of entertainment in between the real action that is coming up which is Test Cricket. Although I agree that Cricket Players should be paid well and fairly for the game they love to play. It becomes rediculous that these players should earn multi-million dollar packages. It makes you wonder are they playing for the love of the game, or just to make money. Nothing wrong with making money, but if you put money before your country then you don't deserve to be in this game!

Sampdoria
on October 10, 2009, 9:27 GMT

I agree 101% with chandau. I dont know why people are getting so worked up about players making some money for their futures. Intl teams consist of only 11 players and a bunch of substitutes. What about the other hundreds of unknowns who never get through the system.

At least in all club competitions in all the countries, they will get recognized and known to larger audiences outside their country. Im already enjoying looking at some local players from SAfrica and Australia in this Champions league.

I think the "puritians" will die out eventually with their selfish rigid take on how cricketers should be behaving - anyone seen football lately?. We the audience won't care about anyone who wont play well for his country. At least at club level they get a chance to make their future similar to, Im sure all hard working audience members who are also doing so?

Genio
on October 9, 2009, 23:47 GMT

I have just one question to the author. Who will feed Piyush Chawla when he is too old to play cricket. He needs to earn money now to live after he retires.

Manube
on October 9, 2009, 23:29 GMT

Being a New South Welshman and Australian I was extremely proud of our teams performance last night.

@NBRADEE I think one reason the Australia domestic teams are very strong is that we only have 6 domestic teams at the highest level. To get a spot on one of these teams is extremely competitive, as a result you have the best competing against the best and this elevates the standard. Unlike English country cricket where there are just too many teams and the standard is low. So I like your idea about a Carribean professional league but 12 teams is way too many for a small country.

thegamelord
on October 9, 2009, 21:15 GMT

it seems that hell has frozen over, redneck... IPL is a huge success not because of the lack of domestic competitions... what do you know about the domestic competitions in India? IPL is popular because of what it delivers..high quality cricket and great entertainment. Champions League and IPL is not going/trying to overtake international cricket as well... How many players opted to play for IPL if their national team is having a series? zero... People love international cricket. If the stadium is not packed, it doesn't mean that people has lost interest. I may not be able to go to a stadium where a match is being played, but I definitely keep track of the match by other means like internet, mobile phone or television. I am sure most people do the same.

OliverChettle
on October 9, 2009, 15:48 GMT

Cricket is not the only sport in this position. In rugby union, the international game is also the cash cow. The clubs/provinces/franchises are closer to being financially viable as independent entities than traditional first class cricket teams, but they receive substantial subsidies from the various national bodies.

Woody111
on October 12, 2009, 5:08 GMT

The Champions League is exactly what 20/20 should be - NOT National side cricket. Leave this rubbish for clubs and provinces to make some cash with. Let Nations compete in meaningful real cricket. If players have to think twice about representing their country vs club/franchise club - let them play for the club, and never represent their country again. This is getting rediculous. All these spoilt brats are forgetting what the players of the 70s did for them. Chappell and co. had fulltime jobs when they played cricket. How much does Nannes want? You're 33 for heaven's sake! Oh boo hoo you'll have to work in a job at 38 years of age when you're not playing cricket. Welcome to the real world!

Cric_123
on October 11, 2009, 13:35 GMT

I'm really not sure why everyone associates these leagues with high standard of cricket..IPL was average and I do not expect Champions League to be any better...We must realize, when we compare cricket with football, that there is a clear difference between the quality of players competing in some of the big football leagues and those playing in these pathetic T20 Leagues...Cricket does not have the required depth of talent and ability at this time...I sincerely hope that this improves in future...These leagues are being organized for commercial reasons only..

@Champions League...Let's rename it as Loser's League...3 Teams each from India and Australia (8th and 12th Nation in T20 Worldcup)..Only 4 Teams from 3 semi finalists (NZ, Sri, WI) and none from Pakistan (World Champions)...And we are expecting a good standard of Cricket!!

Vijaykumarsstar
on October 10, 2009, 13:27 GMT

cntd of my last post...After all Cricket is no more a one way game. I started watchin cricket as a 12 year old kid in 1996, by now i started
loosing interst in the game, but this model has renewed it all.It has turned to a players game.

Vijaykumarsstar
on October 10, 2009, 13:26 GMT

I don't think these players going after money is bad. At end of the day, every one of us are running behind it.
The fact that lot of people are angry about is because of the jealousy. This is similar like people changing companies.
If you say this is wrong then that is too wrong. This world is run with the money, there is no person in this world who says
he will work for free. As of the comparison with Football, I don't think we can these are 2 different sports.
Football is an all weather sport and Cricket is a summer sport. You cannot play Cricket throught the year in one place.
That is were the freelancers come to play. They add more glamour to the management and the game expands to good management.
Administrators should stop complaining and start working, they have to take this as a challenge.
Either they have to bring everyone into there own parameter or create a new parameter to accomadate these all.

CharonTFm
on October 10, 2009, 11:43 GMT

Test Cricket and T20 Cricket are completely different games with different strategies and mindset. A great T20 Player doesn't make him a great Test Player and so on. Even if the best Club Players and brought into the National Squad, without testing them on the longer format they will not do well.

These Club games are just a phase of entertainment in between the real action that is coming up which is Test Cricket. Although I agree that Cricket Players should be paid well and fairly for the game they love to play. It becomes rediculous that these players should earn multi-million dollar packages. It makes you wonder are they playing for the love of the game, or just to make money. Nothing wrong with making money, but if you put money before your country then you don't deserve to be in this game!

Sampdoria
on October 10, 2009, 9:27 GMT

I agree 101% with chandau. I dont know why people are getting so worked up about players making some money for their futures. Intl teams consist of only 11 players and a bunch of substitutes. What about the other hundreds of unknowns who never get through the system.

At least in all club competitions in all the countries, they will get recognized and known to larger audiences outside their country. Im already enjoying looking at some local players from SAfrica and Australia in this Champions league.

I think the "puritians" will die out eventually with their selfish rigid take on how cricketers should be behaving - anyone seen football lately?. We the audience won't care about anyone who wont play well for his country. At least at club level they get a chance to make their future similar to, Im sure all hard working audience members who are also doing so?

Genio
on October 9, 2009, 23:47 GMT

I have just one question to the author. Who will feed Piyush Chawla when he is too old to play cricket. He needs to earn money now to live after he retires.

Manube
on October 9, 2009, 23:29 GMT

Being a New South Welshman and Australian I was extremely proud of our teams performance last night.

@NBRADEE I think one reason the Australia domestic teams are very strong is that we only have 6 domestic teams at the highest level. To get a spot on one of these teams is extremely competitive, as a result you have the best competing against the best and this elevates the standard. Unlike English country cricket where there are just too many teams and the standard is low. So I like your idea about a Carribean professional league but 12 teams is way too many for a small country.

thegamelord
on October 9, 2009, 21:15 GMT

it seems that hell has frozen over, redneck... IPL is a huge success not because of the lack of domestic competitions... what do you know about the domestic competitions in India? IPL is popular because of what it delivers..high quality cricket and great entertainment. Champions League and IPL is not going/trying to overtake international cricket as well... How many players opted to play for IPL if their national team is having a series? zero... People love international cricket. If the stadium is not packed, it doesn't mean that people has lost interest. I may not be able to go to a stadium where a match is being played, but I definitely keep track of the match by other means like internet, mobile phone or television. I am sure most people do the same.

OliverChettle
on October 9, 2009, 15:48 GMT

Cricket is not the only sport in this position. In rugby union, the international game is also the cash cow. The clubs/provinces/franchises are closer to being financially viable as independent entities than traditional first class cricket teams, but they receive substantial subsidies from the various national bodies.

NBRADEE
on October 9, 2009, 14:07 GMT

Here in the Windies, we were shocked to have witnessed the strength and calibre of the NSW Blues in the recently completed came against the weaker (lineup) Cobras. News is that Dwayne Bravo and Chris Gayle will play alongside such illustrious company in the upcoming season of the Big Bash in Australia, an opportunity for some youngsters here who idolise cricketers who wear the Baggy Green instead of the perennial losers who wear maroon!
Meanwhile, the Windies are represented at this competition by a soverign nation (TnT), which means that only the best players born in this country can play. Obviously this scenario needs to be addressed by the ICC/WICB. Personally, I wish that a Caribbean professional league, with perhaps twelve franchises can be a part of Caribbean cricket futures, if only to have our competitions here be graced by international players mixed with the best Caribbean cricketers, something that can increase our international fortunes as well.

niravmodi
on October 9, 2009, 13:16 GMT

Sometimes the issue is players how good they are, will not be picked for national teams. Look at Napier of England. Also there may be players who are given a chance at the wrong time and then dumped like Key of England. If i try to use Sri Lankan examples i wont have enough space. It took many years for people to realize PJ is the best keeper in the world!! Because of Warney, McGill played few matches in 15 years. Hence there must be a system for players to make a decent living even if the country discards them. Why is it people make an issue of the money cricketers earn??

StaalBurgher
on October 9, 2009, 11:06 GMT

I am 29 years old. If you take away Test cricket I will stop caring what happens in cricket all together. International competition is what it is about. Rugby is like that. In the Southern Hemisphere the Super 14 domestic comp is a warmup for the international Test matches. That is what everyone aims for - both players and spectators. It is only soccer that leans heavily to clubs instead of international - and, well, soccer is a pretty crummy sport. And please note there are many mismatched even in the English Premier League. The ICC and national boards must just arrange fixed windows for these leagues to take place where players can warm-up for the international season and earn some big money. Then the real cricket can begin.

EdEd
on October 9, 2009, 9:00 GMT

I'm getting a little confused here. I was under the impression that the Champions League was an international event for the winners and runners up of the respective domestic 20/20 competitions - or is it actually a concept owned by the IPL?

With regard to club vs country, it's going to take a long time before new franchises can command the same type of response from the fans as the national teams do. The UK system which runs the teams on the existing county basis allows the fastest adoption of teams, but some of the new franchises elsewhere are really going to struggle to establish an identity. How soon before we see a US style scenario where teams move from city to city under new ownership?

RD80
on October 9, 2009, 8:17 GMT

One issue is that club cricket cannot match the intensity attached to an international match... not yet at least.. Having said that, Indian-Pakistan, Ashes, AUS-SA, India-SA matches are happening way too often in the past decade to be really intense. So where does that leave us?? Maybe a mix of both is the soln...Tier based test and T20 club championships structured along global lines... also audience should be made aware who are the players in other countries beyond the national players... so that they can have a view about what their home team needs.. like in football... and on top of that we get a intl league (again tier based) with few matches building towards a championship... anywhich way, the focus should be what the fans want

AashP
on October 9, 2009, 8:13 GMT

Test Cricket is ultimate cricket, but problem now a days with people is time...no body has time to watch cricket for five days..they will follow it on internet or watch a bit on tv but not whole day...there very few people who will do it and that also on series basis. 20-20 is like 3 hours and finished. Secondly I agree that the teams representing countries and the county's there is huge difference and we can see more stronger teams participating in IPL and CL as they have players for all occassions.

Gizza
on October 9, 2009, 7:31 GMT

The clubs vs country battle isn't as straightforward in other sports as this article implies. In rugby for example, the Southern Hemisphere Tri-nations and Bledisoe Cup are way more popular than the domestic Super 14. Also what will be the biggest sports match next year? Man U vs Chelsea in the EPL or the Football World Cup final? And in soccer it is not only the World Cup that is respected. The Euro tournament is also hugely popular.

So ultimately cricket will have to find a balance between club and country. It doesn't have to be one-sided as Nagraj thinks it will be though.

As an aside, they could also bring inter-club games in ODI's and Test matches. How about Yorkshire vs NSW playing 2 five-day first class matches just befoer the Ashes as an appetiser? Similar matches can be held all over the world.

chandau
on October 9, 2009, 6:59 GMT

Sometimes the issue is players how good they are, will not be picked for national teams. Look at Napier of England. Also there may be players who are given a chance at the wrong time and then dumped like Key of England. If i try to use Sri Lankan examples i wont have enough space. It took many years for people to realize PJ is the best keeper in the world!! Because of Warney, McGill played few matches in 15 years. Hence there must be a system for players to make a decent living even if the country discards them. Why is it people make an issue of the money cricketers earn?? they never question the salaries paid to the administrators who do not much but are well looked after. DO they question the CEO salaries in companies? In fact do they wonder if the salaries and perks they themselves earn are justified? Company executives go from job to job, that is called climbing the ladder of success. Cricketers do it and they are mercenaries!!! GET A LIFE PEOPLE... :) Cheers Sri Lanka

redneck
on October 9, 2009, 5:47 GMT

well as a consumer i will go out and pay money to watch australia play, but hell will freeze over before i pay to watch some franchise that i have no feeling for or against play. if what maxwell says comes to pass i dont see it helping the game in countries where cricket already has a foothold. look at soccer here in australia we may get 20,000 to adelaide v melbourne if both teams are doing well & less if there not, but if the Aust soccer team play a home game against any old european nation that will attract a full house at the mcg every time! i think cricket would find it to be simmilar, a couple of franchises doing well may pull 20,000 but it will never sell the stadium out like the national team can! i think the ipl is viewed as such a success in india because before that india had very little in the way of domestic comps in any sport, most other countries already have an over saturated market with domestic comps 4 every sport, which is what makes international cricket so special!

No featured comments at the moment.

redneck
on October 9, 2009, 5:47 GMT

well as a consumer i will go out and pay money to watch australia play, but hell will freeze over before i pay to watch some franchise that i have no feeling for or against play. if what maxwell says comes to pass i dont see it helping the game in countries where cricket already has a foothold. look at soccer here in australia we may get 20,000 to adelaide v melbourne if both teams are doing well & less if there not, but if the Aust soccer team play a home game against any old european nation that will attract a full house at the mcg every time! i think cricket would find it to be simmilar, a couple of franchises doing well may pull 20,000 but it will never sell the stadium out like the national team can! i think the ipl is viewed as such a success in india because before that india had very little in the way of domestic comps in any sport, most other countries already have an over saturated market with domestic comps 4 every sport, which is what makes international cricket so special!

chandau
on October 9, 2009, 6:59 GMT

Sometimes the issue is players how good they are, will not be picked for national teams. Look at Napier of England. Also there may be players who are given a chance at the wrong time and then dumped like Key of England. If i try to use Sri Lankan examples i wont have enough space. It took many years for people to realize PJ is the best keeper in the world!! Because of Warney, McGill played few matches in 15 years. Hence there must be a system for players to make a decent living even if the country discards them. Why is it people make an issue of the money cricketers earn?? they never question the salaries paid to the administrators who do not much but are well looked after. DO they question the CEO salaries in companies? In fact do they wonder if the salaries and perks they themselves earn are justified? Company executives go from job to job, that is called climbing the ladder of success. Cricketers do it and they are mercenaries!!! GET A LIFE PEOPLE... :) Cheers Sri Lanka

Gizza
on October 9, 2009, 7:31 GMT

The clubs vs country battle isn't as straightforward in other sports as this article implies. In rugby for example, the Southern Hemisphere Tri-nations and Bledisoe Cup are way more popular than the domestic Super 14. Also what will be the biggest sports match next year? Man U vs Chelsea in the EPL or the Football World Cup final? And in soccer it is not only the World Cup that is respected. The Euro tournament is also hugely popular.

So ultimately cricket will have to find a balance between club and country. It doesn't have to be one-sided as Nagraj thinks it will be though.

As an aside, they could also bring inter-club games in ODI's and Test matches. How about Yorkshire vs NSW playing 2 five-day first class matches just befoer the Ashes as an appetiser? Similar matches can be held all over the world.

AashP
on October 9, 2009, 8:13 GMT

Test Cricket is ultimate cricket, but problem now a days with people is time...no body has time to watch cricket for five days..they will follow it on internet or watch a bit on tv but not whole day...there very few people who will do it and that also on series basis. 20-20 is like 3 hours and finished. Secondly I agree that the teams representing countries and the county's there is huge difference and we can see more stronger teams participating in IPL and CL as they have players for all occassions.

RD80
on October 9, 2009, 8:17 GMT

One issue is that club cricket cannot match the intensity attached to an international match... not yet at least.. Having said that, Indian-Pakistan, Ashes, AUS-SA, India-SA matches are happening way too often in the past decade to be really intense. So where does that leave us?? Maybe a mix of both is the soln...Tier based test and T20 club championships structured along global lines... also audience should be made aware who are the players in other countries beyond the national players... so that they can have a view about what their home team needs.. like in football... and on top of that we get a intl league (again tier based) with few matches building towards a championship... anywhich way, the focus should be what the fans want

EdEd
on October 9, 2009, 9:00 GMT

I'm getting a little confused here. I was under the impression that the Champions League was an international event for the winners and runners up of the respective domestic 20/20 competitions - or is it actually a concept owned by the IPL?

With regard to club vs country, it's going to take a long time before new franchises can command the same type of response from the fans as the national teams do. The UK system which runs the teams on the existing county basis allows the fastest adoption of teams, but some of the new franchises elsewhere are really going to struggle to establish an identity. How soon before we see a US style scenario where teams move from city to city under new ownership?

StaalBurgher
on October 9, 2009, 11:06 GMT

I am 29 years old. If you take away Test cricket I will stop caring what happens in cricket all together. International competition is what it is about. Rugby is like that. In the Southern Hemisphere the Super 14 domestic comp is a warmup for the international Test matches. That is what everyone aims for - both players and spectators. It is only soccer that leans heavily to clubs instead of international - and, well, soccer is a pretty crummy sport. And please note there are many mismatched even in the English Premier League. The ICC and national boards must just arrange fixed windows for these leagues to take place where players can warm-up for the international season and earn some big money. Then the real cricket can begin.

niravmodi
on October 9, 2009, 13:16 GMT

Sometimes the issue is players how good they are, will not be picked for national teams. Look at Napier of England. Also there may be players who are given a chance at the wrong time and then dumped like Key of England. If i try to use Sri Lankan examples i wont have enough space. It took many years for people to realize PJ is the best keeper in the world!! Because of Warney, McGill played few matches in 15 years. Hence there must be a system for players to make a decent living even if the country discards them. Why is it people make an issue of the money cricketers earn??

NBRADEE
on October 9, 2009, 14:07 GMT

Here in the Windies, we were shocked to have witnessed the strength and calibre of the NSW Blues in the recently completed came against the weaker (lineup) Cobras. News is that Dwayne Bravo and Chris Gayle will play alongside such illustrious company in the upcoming season of the Big Bash in Australia, an opportunity for some youngsters here who idolise cricketers who wear the Baggy Green instead of the perennial losers who wear maroon!
Meanwhile, the Windies are represented at this competition by a soverign nation (TnT), which means that only the best players born in this country can play. Obviously this scenario needs to be addressed by the ICC/WICB. Personally, I wish that a Caribbean professional league, with perhaps twelve franchises can be a part of Caribbean cricket futures, if only to have our competitions here be graced by international players mixed with the best Caribbean cricketers, something that can increase our international fortunes as well.

OliverChettle
on October 9, 2009, 15:48 GMT

Cricket is not the only sport in this position. In rugby union, the international game is also the cash cow. The clubs/provinces/franchises are closer to being financially viable as independent entities than traditional first class cricket teams, but they receive substantial subsidies from the various national bodies.